Do the sexes tend to segregate in roe deer in agricultural environments? An analysis of group composition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We studied the composition of European roe deer, Capreolus capreolus (L., 1758), groupings in agricultural fields in northern France throughout an annual cycle to examine whether adult males and adult females tended to live in separate groups as is usually reported for gregarious ruminants. In April, shortly after the beginning of territoriality in mature males, single-sex groups were more frequent than expected by chance, evoking the grouping pattern reported in many territorial antelope species living in open landscapes. In contrast, mixed-sex groups were more frequent than expected by chance from October to January when adult males were no longer territorial and when large groups were formed. In addition, during this last period, females with attendant young were less sociable towards adult conspecifics than were males. Females with attendant young are known to be less sociable than adult males in several other deer species of the subfamily Odocoileinae. We hypothesize that this “sex-biased sociability” explains both the over-frequency of mixed-sex groups recorded in our roe deer population and the grouping patterns exhibited by sexually segregating Odocoileinae species.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".